The Phantom Spirit Trolleys
Casey Cornett brings up a familiar complaint:
The Spirit Trolleys are phantom. I see them occasionally around Bricktown… I don’t see signs pointing to where any stop is, occasionally I’ll stumble upon a trolley stop sign but it doesn’t tell me any information.
| Tuesday, July 1, 2008 Edition: CITY, Section: BUSINESS, Page 4B |
John and Debbie Rowley are just the sort of tourists wanted by Oklahoma City as it seeks to make its downtown a regional attraction.They traveled by plane to Oklahoma City earlier this month from their home in Petersburg, Ill., to see the Red Earth Festival at the Cox Convention Center.
They spent three nights at the neighboring Courtyard by Marriott, visited the Oklahoma City National Memorial, ate at Bricktown’s restaurants and took a water taxi cruise on the Bricktown Canal.
They raved about downtown’s attractions, they raved about the Red Earth Festival, they raved about their accommodations and the friendliness of the people they met.
But they’ve got one complaint — and it echoes concerns I’ve reported previously voiced by downtown residents: the Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys.
Waiting game
“We stood for 50 minutes at a shuttle stop (the Blue line) that was across from the Cox Center (the Myriad Gardens location),” Debbie Rowley said.
“Finally we and several other visitors to your city walked to our destinations with much disappointment.
“After spending four hours at the Memorial, we once again waited for the shuttle. This time we waited for 40 minutes, but it did arrive. Every place we saw advertising this shuttle, it said it would arrive every 20 minutes. Not so.”
Ouch, that hurts.
As reported before, the downtown trolley service reductions the past few years were followed this year with the city spending more than $350,000 in an addition to public transit aimed at downtown — the Oklahoma River Cruisers.
Downtown residents have complained that the trolley routes and schedules are not reliable — now we’re hearing the same thing from visitors like the Rowleys.
No big changes in sight
So far, no substantial trolley changes are coming for downtown visitors or residents. The Central Oklahoma Transportation Authority’s spokesman, Michael Scoggins, said Monday that some tweaks are being planned for the Orange line that serves that Interstate 40/Meridian Avenue corridor that might add a stop at the Oklahoma City National Memorial.
The Rowleys, meanwhile, have no regrets about their Oklahoma City visit, their first in a decade. And they would recommend it as a summer vacation stop to their friends.
Their only warning: Don’t rely on the Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
Trolleys and fixed rail transit should be light years apart, in terms of reliability. Jeff Bezdek is probably the best person to address this issue, and hopefully he’ll have a comment here. But regardless, the city should be ashamed of the way the trolley system operates. It would almost be better not to have them at all, then have such a random, disorganized system. They and our bus system need a major overhaul. If we want to be a real city, we need a real transit system.
Steve, and Friends….
My balloon artist friends in the area will be hosting a seminar this next weekend, Oct. 10-11. Our guest designer and our out-of-town guests will be staying in the I-40/Meridian area. We plan to take the Orange trolley to Bricktown on the 10th. I hope and plan to give you a first-hand opinion of the trolley today. I do not expect excellence from COTPA, but I shall be fair in my evaluation.
John, would you be interested in taking a shot as a guest blogger? You’ve been one of this site’s regular participants and I’d be happy to help you provide a first person account of your experience (assuming this doesn’t give COTPA advance warning to improve their game for you next weekend).
City Council and Mayor Cornett should keep their tails between their legs until they figure out a way to better fund the downtown Trolley’s. This needs to be an urgent priority in the interim, until MTP and others can build a modern mass transit system if MAPS 3 is passed. MAPS 3 will provide significant (key word) funding for mass transit, currently, I think we’re spending like $2 million a year which is nothing. Say it is $2 million, let’s throw in another million a year for it and we have the potential to improve efficiency by 50%!! We can surely find a million dollars we can cut from somewhere in the annual budget that would be MUCH better served on adding another trolley or two to the downtown system.
Hi. I am posting the downtown Neighborhood Association (Urban Neighbors) report on the trolley system from 2008. Please keep in mind, this report was filled a temporary resolution to the trolley troubles. However, the trolleys were purchased under MAPS 1 and are reaching their life expectancy. The report strongly encourages a permanent “future” solution. The UN is supportive of the streetcar concept.
URBAN NEIGHBORS
DOWNTOWN TRANSPORTATION SUBCOMITTEE
Downtown “Trolley” System Reprogramming Preliminary Report
August 2, 2008
TASK- The UN Transportation Subcommittee has reviewed the Public Transportation options in the Downtown area. This review of current transportation ability was stimulated by concerns regarding the success and programming of the existing system.
ASSESSMENT- Urban Neighbors has solicited input from its membership of downtown residents and workers as well as tourists and the general public. We have engaged in a fruitful dialogue with Metro Transit and we have reviewed available information and opinions to analyze the current situation.
FINDINGS- The subcommittee realizes that the current available transit service is faced with many challenges. The downtown areas use has changed dramatically over the past decade with new potential transit users and trip needs.
The existing transit system is-
1. Poorly understood by the General Public
2. Faces low ridership on key routes
3. Timings and actual arrivals at stops are inconsistent
4. Stops are poorly identified
5. Stops feature limited information (Route maps, schedule times and
actual arrivals)
6. Hours of service are limited and poorly advertised
7. Onboard stop information is inconsistent or not available
8. Existing system is not configured for 2008 and future ridership demographics in 2008 and the future
The primary existing downtown service is provided by the “trolley-like” bus vehicles funded through the MAPS I initiative. Some parts of this service have been discontinued due to low ridership or funding pressures since its inception. Some operational funding has been redirected from downtown to other areas at various times over the 10 years of operation. The existing system is poorly understood by the general public. This confusion has caused poor ridership on routes that should exhibit higher ridership. Existing and new riders are often challenged by the inconsistent service delivery. In our assessment period, we received many complaints regarding late or no arrivals.
While several stops are clearly identified at the Ford Center, OKC National Memorial, and Bricktown, most stops are not clearly obvious. Many stops appear indistinguishable from standard bus stops unless directly read by pedestrian traffic. These “regular” stops feature only limited signage and do not display running time, actual arrival time, and projected arrival time. Actual riders of the system have responded that the information regarding upcoming stops and or points of interest are not consistently conveyed by on-board signage or audible announcement.
The most challenging aspect of the current system is that it does not efficiently serve the needs of the growing and diversified downtown community. Existing routes and stops are primarily configured for tourism. New citizen demographics and needs have evolved with new residential, office, health care and medical research development. Diversified business growth, new neighborhood corridors, and continued entertainment development lead to increased demand for Public Transportation, especially as fuel costs rise.
SOLUTIONS
1. Conduct detailed analysis to establish new routes
2. Determine reprogramming operational costs
3. Reprogram system routes
4. Rehabilitate existing vehicles
5. Design and install distinctive stop locations
6. Improve and expand hours of service
7. Use current technology to improve user information of scheduled and actual arrivals
8. Embark on comprehensive marketing and information campaign
9. Improve on-board experience with automated and consistent stop announcements
10. New infrastructure should be designed for easy migration to a modern, ecological, customer friendly transit system
The Transportation Subcommittee recommends that a detailed analysis should be conducted of potential new routes. Public and private input must be solicited from business, residential, development, entertainment, and tourism stakeholders. The input gathered should identify routes that service these various demographics, in order to maintain good ridership levels during all operational hours. Certain specific demographics may entice more direct routes, but stability and consistent ridership will help maintain the health of the system. Also, a diverse and eclectic ridership would justify a broadened daily operational period.
Upon considering the data collected from stakeholders and available statistics, an optimal transit routing solution must be priced out. The system should be reprogrammed to the level of funds available and desired for further economic development. The existing operational “trolley-like” vehicles should be rehabilitated cosmetically and functionally for their remaining three years before they are life-expired. They should be reprogrammed with new on-board features for their prospective new uses. Bins, shelving, cargo nets, and other storage amenities should be incorporated to assist with groceries and other physical goods. Current technology should be incorporated for automated GPS activated audible and visual indicators regarding upcoming stops and tourist interest. The vehicle routes should be more clearly identified via vehicle colors or the reinstatement of the colored flag bumper indicators. Such enhancements will distinguish vehicles for pedestrian interaction.
Distinctive, downtown-specific stop designators should be designed to incorporate operational information. These designators should also include current technology with GPS displays or audible signal to indicate the actual arrival time of a vehicle. Such designators could also incorporate kiosk features with additional relevant information. They should also be designed for authorized removal and transfer to new locations for future system upgrades or re-alignment.
A comprehensive public information and marketing campaign must be implemented to increase awareness and ridership of the reprogrammed system. Such marketing will reinforce the accessibility and utility of the system to all potential user demographics. In addition, the ridership experience should be improved with vehicle operators that are trained in enhanced customer service. The personal interface between “trolley” operators and riders should follow the “Downtown Ambassador” model. Vehicle operators should be helpful in assisting customers with diverse knowledge of downtown, vehicle stops, points of interest, and available amenities. They should also assist downtown residents who have special needs including the proper stowage of physical items.
OTHER FINDINGS- The Urban Neighbors Transportation Subcommittee noted in its initial surveys and interaction with potential users that increased fares to cover enhanced services would be acceptable. The subcommittee emphasizes that the existing “trolley-like” bus vehicles have a limited life expectancy and encourages the benefits and experience of a re-programmed system to be migrated over to permanent future solutions. There is great desire for a modern transportation solution that can permanently service the downtown and central city where density levels increasingly significantly. The success of improvements to the existing system should assist in the future development of transportation in all areas of the Oklahoma City metroplex.
So COPTA has oversight of the trolleys, right? What’s their excuse for the erratic service? Seems like getting trolleys on time is a pretty basic task.
Maybe it’s time someone give them a hard look under the hood.
Agree completely Steve. you put it best in one of your links above:
“Should a city be ensuring existing transit is being well run and funded before launching into an entirely new and untested form of public transit?”
What does this say about the proposed MAPS 3 streetcars? One can hope, but will they be run any better? (again, not against them, but this does give one cause for concern). Have questions that I hope someone can address in the Nick Roberts post (won’t repeat them here).
The trolleys are geared primarily towards tourists and need to serve the tourist well. What good does it do to spend 100s of millions of dollars to build the proposed new Convention Center to bring in more tourists if we are shooting ourselves in the foot with the Trolley troubles? Seems counter-productive, doesn’t it?